Affordable Cine Zoom Lenses for Blackmagic Cameras

You are just starting out with video, and I think that you are getting some very bad advice. Bluntly, my suggestion is that you ignore a lot of the "advice" you're getting in this thread, because some of it is complete rubbish that is going to wind up, if you follow it, costing a lot of money.

In all fairness to the people who have been kind enough to offer advice, I did ask the question "which would you pick". I am sure they based their opinion(s) on the work that they have done. Although subjective, they are answering what I asked. I have seen video's in both focal lengths and see the wisdom of having both of the lenses in question, but again, I can only afford one right now.

In my personal opinion, I do find the Sigma Art lens to be nice, but lacking in overall cinematic qualities (as some others have mentioned), and the overall look of the finished quality.

I am often asked why I select certain guitars for recording or live use, when at the end of the day, "they all sound the same". Well first off, to my ears they are distinctly different. Secondly, it is also about inspiration. The feel of the neck, string action, different pickups, cause me to approach the guitars in different ways thus inspiring me to create in different ways. It's not always about the audience, but what inspires the artist to create to the best of his ability. This is the way I see lenses.

For the record, I do not subscribe to the notion "More expensive = better", but as with guitars, the big difference in price, to a point, is quality, which is also important to me. I have purchased "cheap" guitars which constantly detune, the electronics, wear out, etc., and so they basically become unusable. Then there are times when a "cheap" guitar has put a smile on my face. It has all the characteristics of a much more expensive guitar.

Again, this is an expensive hobby for me, but I don't mind paying a little extra for quality and in this case, the look that I am going for.

In my personal opinion, I do find the Sigma Art lens to be nice, but lacking in overall cinematic qualities (as some others have mentioned), and the overall look of the finished quality.

...

For the record, I do not subscribe to the notion "More expensive = better", but as with guitars, the big difference in price, to a point, is quality, which is also important to me. I have purchased "cheap" guitars which constantly detune, the electronics, wear out, etc., and so they basically become unusable. Then there are times when a "cheap" guitar has put a smile on my face. It has all the characteristics of a much more expensive guitar.

Again, this is an expensive hobby for me, but I don't mind paying a little extra for quality and in this case, the look that I am going for.

I think that you are still failing to distinguish between mechanical and glass issues.

These DZFilm lenses are not the cinema equivalent of high-end guitars. In reviews, they are being described as “cheap”, “affordable” and “budget”. Those are direct quotes. You are paying for certain lens mechanics, and if reviews are to be believed, you are getting decent, but not great, glass.

It isn’t even clear whether you’ve thought through the pros and cons of zooms and primes. Before buying, you really should put a zoom and a prime on your camera and think about what is going to work best for you.

I remain of the view that asking people what focal length range to buy/use for your video work is not something that makes any sense given that you have both a background in still photography and the Sigma 18-35mm in hand.

Anyway, it’s your money.

Quite a few folks at reduser.net are discussing the use of Leica-R and Zeiss Contax C/Y lenses for serious cine use.
Of course, they have their lenses 'cinefied' for better handling, but there are very renowned cinematographers among them.
Optically, these are very fine glass (and not exactly cheap).

As I’m sure you know, not so long ago you couldn’t give Leica R lenses away.

Leica’s M (typ 240) gave them a new lease on life. Unfortunately, I didn’t buy any R lenses when I got my own M 240. I regret that now

In my personal opinion, I do find the Sigma Art lens to be nice, but lacking in overall cinematic qualities (as some others have mentioned), and the overall look of the finished quality.

...

For the record, I do not subscribe to the notion "More expensive = better", but as with guitars, the big difference in price, to a point, is quality, which is also important to me. I have purchased "cheap" guitars which constantly detune, the electronics, wear out, etc., and so they basically become unusable. Then there are times when a "cheap" guitar has put a smile on my face. It has all the characteristics of a much more expensive guitar.

Again, this is an expensive hobby for me, but I don't mind paying a little extra for quality and in this case, the look that I am going for.

I think that you are still failing to distinguish between mechanical and glass issues.

These DZFilm lenses are not the cinema equivalent of high-end guitars. In reviews, they are being described as “cheap”, “affordable” and “budget”. Those are direct quotes. You are paying for certain lens mechanics, and if reviews are to be believed, you are getting decent, but not great, glass.

It isn’t even clear whether you’ve thought through the pros and cons of zooms and primes. Before buying, you really should put a zoom and a prime on your camera and think about what is going to work best for you.

I remain of the view that asking people what focal length range to buy/use for your video work is not something that makes any sense given that you have both a background in still photography and the Sigma 18-35mm in hand.

Anyway, it’s your money.

I am not dismissing your advice, I actually welcome it as a part of this healthy debate.

First off, I think you are misunderstanding the whole focal length thing. I should have simply asked which lens do you find yourself using more and which inspires you more. Of course I have experience with a variety of focal ranges including 18-35mm. That goes without saying. My original leanings are with the DZFilm 20-55mm since that is what I mainly shoot with on the photography side. As an artist, I am also open to suggestions/recommendations. In this case particularly since I am new to the concept of "Cine Lenses".

Sticking with the guitar references, I own for example a Gibson Les Paul Historic 59. Amazing guitar, and for the year it was built in (2003), it is considered to be one of the finest that Gibson has ever produced. They are expensive at up to ~$6000 - ~$10, 000 used. As a side note, and actual 1959 Gibson Les Paul can fetch upwards of a half million dollars (vintage collectable). Amazing guitars. Let's call these "High end professional lenses"

I also happened to come across a a 2014 Fender Telecaster (made in Mexico). Once I picked it up it, had that perfect worn in solid feeling and sounded amazing. It wasn't until after I looked at the back of the headstock that I realized it was made in Mexico. That is blasphemy in many guitar player circles. But guess which guitar I pick up the most when writing new material. Yep, the MIM Telecaster. I own a total of 10 guitars all in varying price ranges. Right now I am looking for my MIM Fender Telecaster lens equivalent.

Based on personal ungraded footage I am seeing from the Sigma 18-35mm Art lens so far (including what I am seeing online). Vs the ungraded footage I am seeing online with these DZFilm Pictor lenses, that is the creamy/dreamy/warm (or whatever you want to call it) look that I am going for. timbutt2's footage was the deciding factor.

As you said, it is my money, and I feel the $1600 price difference is well worth it especially if this lens will inspire me. Sadly, I find the Sigma 18-35mm Art uninspiring. I am really trying to like it. I consider myself to be artistic with a good eye. I am also very technical, so I don't think it is a matter of my not knowing what I am doing. Oh, and as for prime vs Zoom lenses, I have always preferred Zoom lenses They fit my worlflow better. I do own a few primes, but rarely use them anymore.

Tim,
can you post the shims you used for your DZO Pictor set? I need to switch mine to EF Mount.

Tim,
can you post the shims you used for your DZO Pictor set? I need to switch mine to EF Mount.

I can’t guarantee that your shims will be the same as mine. There’s a detailed method for checking the parfocal nature of the lens and how to shim it in the manual for the lens. Mine is as follows:



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As I’m sure you know, not so long ago you couldn’t give Leica R lenses away.

I know what you mean. I was coming late to the party for Leica-R, but in time for Zeiss Contax C/Y.
May need to up my insurance now!

But let's not derail the discussion. Actually, a few vintage photographic zooms are parfocal if you have a good adapter (or, better, precise conversion) and grabbed the right sample. Sample variation is one of the factors discerning still from cine lenses and part of the reason for their prices.
And then, cine lenses in professional use get regular servicing. Most vintage photographic ones have not seen that in ages.

Video is finally out:

DZOFILM PICTOR 20-55MM VS ANGENIEUX OPTIMO DP 16-42MM VS SIGMA 18-35MM

the DZO does look pretty good compared to the others.
however i still want some form of character that these seem to be lacking. The OOOM zoom appears to have a little more of that special look.

Interesting video, I thought the test presentations were solid, not hyper-kinetic and thankfully, the goofiness was reserved for the in-between stuff and not part of the tests themselves. I preferred the Angenieux, but not by much and not in every instance. Definitely not by the differential in price. DZO's performance is impressive. The Sigma was meh all the way down the line for me. It would be cool to see a shoot-out with the DZO and Fuji and Ooom.

Interesting video, I thought the test presentations were solid, not hyper-kinetic and thankfully, the goofiness was reserved for the in-between stuff and not part of the tests themselves. I preferred the Angenieux, but not by much and not in every instance. Definitely not by the differential in price. DZO's performance is impressive. The Sigma was meh all the way down the line for me. It would be cool to see a shoot-out with the DZO and Fuji and Ooom.

We might be able to do a Fuji since I think Litewave has a Fujinon Cabrio 20-120 T3.5 and they did compare that against the Laowa Ooom: https://litewavemedia.com/fujinon-cabri ... ns-rental/

Going in I would have thought the ANGENIEUX would blow the doors off the DZO. Definitely not and for sure not all the time. Very interesting.

Newsshooter has a new promotional demonstration of DZO lenses. I'd like to know more about who's behind this brand and what long-term support looks like:

Newsshooter has a new promotional demonstration of DZO lenses. I'd like to know more about who's behind this brand and what long-term support looks like:

I saw the announcement. Wow, what a great price on these. They look really nice so far too. Will be excited to check out more footage. Considering how much I love the zooms I'll definitely try to get my hands on them to test them out. Best part for us BMD users is that they are Full Frame, so that makes them future proof for whenever Blackmagic does go VistaVision with one of their future sensors.

EDIT: Article released on CineD with some specs: https://www.cined.com/dzofilm-releases- ... 2cHDQAtTZs

Lots to like if you manage the flares.

Lots to like if you manage the flares.

Indeed! Now that I have the updated desktop computer I'll look into getting the Vespid lenses. They're perfect for working with the Pictor Zooms. Then I'll be PL completely. Still have to pay off the new computer first; LOL

That will feel very good. Having good tools that you understand well helps you to focus more of your attention on what is in front of your camera.

After researching for a couple of months, and along with the fact that the DZOFilm Pictor 20-55mm and 50-125mm lens bundle has been on back order, I decided to sell some of my music gear and get the dual lens kit instead of just the 20-55mm.

I have seen enough footage with these lenses mounted on the UMG2 to convince me that these will work for me. They do have a nice look about them. For the price point, I haven't seen anything better. Sure the Cookes, Angenieux, and the other big boys look absolutely lovely, but I cant afford even their lower priced offerings or used models. According to UPS, my lenses should be here tomorrow!

Phil Holland likes 'em!

Posted by ProAv today:

One correction. The Fujinon MK lenses, one of which I have, are also available for Micro Four Thirds, which can be adapted for about £200 to L-mount, and for Fuji X-mount.

Thanks for posting the ProAV review which seems to be very objective. It’s certainly appealing but I’d like to know any comments or conclusions you have made as currently your Fujinon MK zoom is at the top of my wishlist for 2021. It’s nice that the DZO will work on both the BMPCC4K and the URSA Mini 4.6K. However I do suspect the DZO breath more than the Fujinon which is an important consideration for narrative work where virtually no breathing is desired.

Thanks for posting the ProAV review which seems to be very objective. It’s certainly appealing but I’d like to know any comments or conclusions you have made as currently your Fujinon MK zoom is at the top of my wishlist for 2021. It’s nice that the DZO will work on both the BMPCC4K and the URSA Mini 4.6K. However I do suspect the DZO breath more than the Fujinon which is an important consideration for narrative work where virtually no breathing is desired.

Hi Rick,

I'm extremely happy with the Fujinon, although it took some getting used to. For one thing, it's my first and only zoom lens. Also, my primes are almost all Leica, the most recent made in 1992, and the Fujinon has a different look. Almost a year later, I wouldn't be without it.

If you decide to get one, note that Fujinon lowers the price from time to time. Currently US$3800, I paid $3300 at the end of last December. See the screen capture. That promo price ended a couple of days later, but I have seen it since. [I'm trying to figure out Capture One and this was a good excuse to try out the healing brush to delete certain info ]

I had hoped to go to the Island last month to visit a relative, and could have lent the lens to you for a few days to try out, but as you know quarantine is still in effect. Drag.

Duclos 1.jpg (47.65 KiB) Viewed 15350 times

I'm trying to figure out Capture One and this was a good excuse to try out the healing brush to delete certain info

I'm on the fence between the Fujinon and DZO as well. Probably going to rent each and play around over the winter.

How are the folks at Duclos? I've yet to have any dealings with them but from Matt's posts, they seem great as well as smart.

Thanks for the feedback. Good you bought your zoom from Duclos which I’d plan on doing as well unless a Canadian supplier made me an offer I can’t refuse (highly unlikely though).

I'm on the fence between the Fujinon and DZO as well. Probably going to rent each and play around over the winter.

How are the folks at Duclos? I've yet to have any dealings with them but from Matt's posts, they seem great as well as smart.

I’d really appreciate seeing your comparison this winter if you’re able to rent both zooms!

Duclos is very good, first class treatment of their customers. If there’s any promotion offered by a vendor, it tends to go to Duclos first as they are recognized by the manufacturers as very much in tune with the needs of professional shooters. Also most lenses only have a one year warranty but if you buy from Duclos, you’re covered for two years. I bought my Tokina 11-20mm PL zoom from Duclos.

I’d really appreciate seeing your comparison this winter if you’re able to rent both zooms!

Duclos is very good, first class treatment of their customers. If there’s any promotion offered by a vendor, it tends to go to Duclos first as they are recognized by the manufacturers as very much in tune with the needs of professional shooters. Also most lenses only have a one year warranty but if you buy from Duclos, you’re covered for two years. I bought my Tokina 11-20mm PL zoom from Duclos.

Rick, I will definitely share. Waiting to see if the DZO 20-55 and 50-125 pop up on lensrentals.com. Right now they have the 10-24 and 20-70. I haven't dug around to see if anyone else has them though. They do have both the Fujinons.

Appreciate the info on Duclos. Will definitely be making this investment with them.

How are the folks at Duclos? I've yet to have any dealings with them but from Matt's posts, they seem great as well as smart.

This was my first purchase from Duclos. It was a straightforward transaction, but my impression is that they're very professional. Lens was properly packed, shipping was expeditious. I was interested in purchasing certain threaded filters from them at the same time, but what they have in terms of accessories is pretty limited. I would be more than happy to deal with Duclos again.

Lens Rentals could certainly share their impressions of the two brands’ zooms with you once they’ve had the time to do their own testing and comparisons. They seem particularly helpful and thorough.

One other comment about the Fujinon MK lenses. In North America, Fujinon's Broadcast Division in New Jersey supports these lenses.* Actual people answer the phone, and they are both knowledgeable and helpful. On my query, they fired off an e-mail to Japan and had the info that I wanted, together with a diagramme, the next day. A pleasure to deal with.

* The exception is the Fuji X-mount version, which is apparently handled by their photo group. My query was about a lens support that is packaged with that version. Instead of passing me off to another department, the Broadcast Division got me the info that I wanted.

Really used the DZOFilm Pictor 20-55mm in an interesting way for this video. This one had a few zooms in it. As well, Shot it all at T2.8 because it was a lower light situation and was shooting 800 ISO on the UMPG2.

Hello guys, i have a bmpcc4k and id like to use it for fiction narrative with action and vfx. Im searching for the lenses, and i choose to buy the Dzofilm MFT but i have a question:

Is the Dzofilm 20-70 mm for MFT compatible with
speedbooster? Because if it is, i can get from just one lens a good cine range, for making dolly and crash zooms no? Or its better getting the both lenses set? (10-24 mm + 20-70 mm).

Thanks

Edit: nevermind, i found that its impossible, due to being already a MFT lens.

Wondering if anyone has used the DZOfilm zooms with a mount adapter. Thinking about wanting one for both super35 as well as BMPC4K and want to know if it will work with the pocket camera.

Thanks for all the great posts.

Hello guys, i have a bmpcc4k and id like to use it for fiction narrative with action and vfx. Im searching for the lenses, and i choose to buy the Dzofilm MFT but i have a question:

Is the Dzofilm 20-70 mm for MFT compatible with
speedbooster? Because if it is, i can get from just one lens a good cine range, for making dolly and crash zooms no? Or its better getting the both lenses set? (10-24 mm + 20-70 mm).

Thanks

Edit: nevermind, i found that its impossible, due to being already a MFT lens.

Well, if your speedbooster takes EF mount then there is the EF mount version of the lenses which you can use with your speedbooster.

It's not advisable to use the DZOFilm Pictor Zooms (20-55mm & 50-125mm) with a speed booster. This is because the rear element is long enough that it will touch the glass of the speed booster. So you could use a mount adapter if it has no glass element to get the EF/PL lens on to the MFT Pocket 4K, but in that case you may as well just be using the MFT Mount Linglung Series (10-20mm & 20-70) of lenses.

So it's more advisable to use the EF Mount Version of the Pictor Zooms on the Pocket 6K or to use them on the URSA Mini Pro cameras in either EF or PL Mount. I'd advice PL since it's the most secure.

There’s some confusion here I believe. 1) I was asked which of the two DZOFILM Pictor lenses I would suggest buying if you could only buy one. I answered that question with my previous post because the post before I was stating that buying the bundle was better. I was pushed to say which one go buy first and I answered that.

Next, Matteo’s Leica R lenses have been cine moded and they helps improve upon some of the still photography lens issues. However, those are also primes and as a result optically are going to be a lot better for modifying to cinema lenses than still zooms. As I said still zooms are not parfocal by nature and with cinema lenses you expect that.

The main topic for this thread is affordable cinema zoom lenses. That is what I’m trying to address. And, in my comparison of the DZOFilm Pictor against the Sigma Art I pointed out the strengths and reasons for the Pictor lens being better for cinema purposes. Especially for an AC on a wireless focus. And, then I stated what I stated and stand by that the lens comparison shoot proved why the Sigma Art doesn’t hold up. The DZOFilm Pictor held up against an $18K lens from Angēnieux. That’s an impressive feat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for getting back Tim? Knowing how much time you've spent with these I was hoping you'd see this.

I've got several BMPCC4K's with an complete set of MFT primes that I really like. Yet there have been times where a set of zooms would be a good thing to have.

But I see myself adding a Super35 body. With that I don't see the MFT zooms being a good investment for where I'm headed. I do have one of the basic Metabones EF-MFT adapters. Though not ideal it would hold me over without any wides until I buy the new body. For that I can either carry a couple MFT primes or pick up a BMPCC6K until I make the change.

It seems that the camera's are moving so fast that it's not a good idea to get to attached. The glass seems to stay around a bit longer. I guess that may be changing a bit now too.

There’s some confusion here I believe. 1) I was asked which of the two DZOFILM Pictor lenses I would suggest buying if you could only buy one. I answered that question with my previous post because the post before I was stating that buying the bundle was better. I was pushed to say which one go buy first and I answered that.

Next, Matteo’s Leica R lenses have been cine moded and they helps improve upon some of the still photography lens issues. However, those are also primes and as a result optically are going to be a lot better for modifying to cinema lenses than still zooms. As I said still zooms are not parfocal by nature and with cinema lenses you expect that.

The main topic for this thread is affordable cinema zoom lenses. That is what I’m trying to address. And, in my comparison of the DZOFilm Pictor against the Sigma Art I pointed out the strengths and reasons for the Pictor lens being better for cinema purposes. Especially for an AC on a wireless focus. And, then I stated what I stated and stand by that the lens comparison shoot proved why the Sigma Art doesn’t hold up. The DZOFilm Pictor held up against an $18K lens from Angēnieux. That’s an impressive feat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for getting back Tim? Knowing how much time you've spent with these I was hoping you'd see this.

I've got several BMPCC4K's with an complete set of MFT primes that I really like. Yet there have been times where a set of zooms would be a good thing to have.

But I see myself adding a Super35 body. With that I don't see the MFT zooms being a good investment for where I'm headed. I do have one of the basic Metabones EF-MFT adapters. Though not ideal it would hold me over without any wides until I buy the new body. For that I can either carry a couple MFT primes or pick up a BMPCC6K until I make the change.

It seems that the camera's are moving so fast that it's not a good idea to get to attached. The glass seems to stay around a bit longer. I guess that may be changing a bit now too.

Yes, investment in glass is always a good bet. I have no problem with investing in Super 35mm because I don't think it's going anywhere. It's been a standard for a very long time. So the DZOFilm Pictor Zooms are great because they cover that sensor size area.

As for VistaVision/Full-Frame the DZOFilm Vespid Primes are covering that spectrum. They are not zooms, but what a lot of people forget is that cinema zooms that cover VistaVision/Full-Frame are more rare and generally cost a lot more to make and sell. That market has been pretty limited. So Primes have been the major player in that arena. Again, I'm not talking about still photography zooms, but cinema zooms.

I also expect S-35 to stay with us, it's the best compromise between resolution and DoF for moving images.
Photographic FF or VistaVision has such a paper-thin DoF that is very difficult to handle and smaller formats than S-35 don't catch enough light, especially with the race to more and more photocells.

I'll share my shim configurations for my lenses in the future.

[/quote]

Hi Tim, can you remember the shim amount you applied for your DZOfilm Pictor Zoom 50-125 PL mount on your Ursa mini Pro? (I own a 12k unit but I guess the flange distance is the same to G2).
My total shim amount is +0.46.

Also, as I'm planning to buy a 6kPro as a Bcam and convert it to PL mount with Woodencamera kit, I wonder if the parfocal is preserved when switching the Pictor Zoom from the Ursa to the Pocket 6k PRO?

Thanks

Hi Tim, can you remember the shim amount you applied for your DZOfilm Pictor Zoom 50-125 PL mount on your Ursa mini Pro? (I own a 12k unit but I guess the flange distance is the same to G2).
My total shim amount is +0.46.

Also, as I'm planning to buy a 6kPro as a Bcam and convert it to PL mount with Woodencamera kit, I wonder if the parfocal is preserved when switching the Pictor Zoom from the Ursa to the Pocket 6k PRO?

Thanks

I truly believe that it will vary per lens. So my Shim amount will be different from yours. The key is to use test focus charts and to measure the shim amount that works for your lens. It will be different for your lens than someone else's.

I have noticed that the Pocket 6K Pro once PL modified needed to have the Wooden Camera PL Mount Shimmed just right in order to match my UMP with its PL Mount. Generally however I noticed no issues with the parfocal nature of the zooms. I mainly fly the Vespid Primes on the Pocket 6K however since they're smaller and lighter. Use a lens support with the Pictor Zooms to be safe.

Just received a notice that the Tokina 25-75mm T2.9 parfocal zoom is on sale for $2,999 USD which is a 40% discount (save $2,000)!

One advantage of the Tokina 25-75mm zoom is that it has an 86mm filter thread. What that means for me is that I can use this zoom as a taking lens for my SLR Magic 1.33x-65 Anamorphot with 86mm threads in the rear giving me a mild controlled anamorphic look. The 3x zoom though is not very much though compared to the wider and longer DZOfilm Tango 18-90mm which has a M105 filter thread. The Tango is much heavier with an outside dimension of 114mm that fits my matte box without an adapter. The Tokina has an outside dimension of 95mm but I have a 95-114mm adapter already.

Tokina is more flexible in terms of shooting options, less expensive than the DZOfilm Tango but that 18-90mm 5x zoom range is so much better to have in a single zoom (comparable to the Cabrio 19-90mm zoom). But there’s no option to add an anamorphic adapter.

One of my clients really wants to shoot with an anamorphic look. But I’d want a longer zoom range than what is available for under $10K.

Hi everyone - I am looking to replace my trusty Sigma 18-35 PL conversion for something with a similar aperture, perhaps a slightly longer reach. Parfocal is a must. FF or S35+ coverage would be a bonus, but not a requirement. Anything that has a similar warm, soft rolloff but clean character like the Sigmas? I have tested the DZOfilm and Laowa zooms but found them not quite right. Would be thankful for any recommendations!

… I have tested the DZOfilm and Laowa zooms but found them not quite right…

Paul, I agree based on what I saw of a quick look at the Laowa Ranger and the Cata Ace. Did you test the DZOfilm Tango 18-90mm?

Hi everyone - I am looking to replace my trusty Sigma 18-35 PL conversion for something with a similar aperture, perhaps a slightly longer reach. Parfocal is a must. FF or S35+ coverage would be a bonus, but not a requirement. Anything that has a similar warm, soft rolloff but clean character like the Sigmas? I have tested the DZOfilm and Laowa zooms but found them not quite right. Would be thankful for any recommendations!

From cine zoom lenses there's nothing that comes to my mind with similar aperture, but from prime's there are quite a lot of options, like:

ELYSAS Muse T1.8
SIRUI VP-1 T/1.4
NiSi Aureus T/1.4
DZOFilm Arles T/1.4
NiSi Athena T/1.9
Nitecore Superior Prime T/2.0

Paul, does the Sigma 28-45 T2 zoom interest you? L-mount available.

https://petapixel.com/2024/09/13/your-f ... 45mm-t2-0/

@Rick I have been looking at the 28-45 and it is definitely ticking a lot of boxes - however I cannot get any clarity on whether the lens is parfocal. Google AI claims it is, while other saying it is "nearly parfocal" and again some reviewers saying not parfocal. For any kind of wireless focus including the dji focus pro I need a parfocal lens, otherwise calibrating zooms becomes a pain. Not even the peta pixel review covers whether the lens is parfocal, honestly its a bit maddening

Sadly I have not been able to test the Tango, it looks quite promising, although a bit big for what I am after. Of the DZOs I only tested the Pictor zooms way back wheen and the Laowa OOOM. Do the rangers maintain a similar look to the 25-100 OOOM in your experience?

@Hykcine appreciate the reply but fast primes I already have (: so looking for a fast zoom in the standard focal length range that basically can live on the camera - for scouts, small projects etc.

@Rick … Of the DZOs I only tested the Pictor zooms way back wheen and the Laowa OOOM. Do the rangers maintain a similar look to the 25-100 OOOM in your experience?
...

Here’s a ProAV review of the Laowa OOOM 25-100 in which Carl claims lens breathing is under control but when I look at the footage there’s definitely lens breathing that would discourage me from recommending it:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7OdD-zTGrUA

Given the 4x zoom range it is useful but, as Carl says, 25mm may not be quite wide enough for my purposes. It’s better than the range of my Tokina 25-75mm though. YMMV.

It’s really tough to find a good zoom without spending a lot of money for best-in-class quality. There will be compromises even with the DZOfilm 18-90mm Tango that remains my best option for nearly all 9K Pyxis work. Pretty much everything with a constant aperture is T2.9 but I’m fine with that.

Rick seems like the Tokina just received a massive price drop at B&H, renewing my interest. What is your take on this lens? Are you using the expander as well?

I’m not using the 1.6x expander but I see the pricing of it is reduced as well. Price is somewhat confusing depending upon whether it’s purchased standalone or in combination with one or two of the zooms.

I don’t think they have a PL-L mount expander but if they did that would be a way to get greater coverage on the Pyxis and BMCC6K with L-mount. Without the expander the zooms cover a 36mm image circle which makes them suitable for 9K 3:2 etc. With the expander they cover 12K 3.2 but not 17K 3.2. The expander does support PL mount on the camera and various other mounts. I haven’t researched it as I haven’t used any expanders or focal reducers. I don’t want to lose about 1.4 stops of light shooting interiors but that would be no issue shooting day exterior. The T2.9 zoom would become about a T4.5 zoom.

I like the Tokina 11-20mm I have and still think about acquiring the 25-75. The 3X zoom does not have the impact of the 5x DZOfilm 18-90mm which is ideal for my needs recording live events. But it’s 2-3x the cost. If Tokina did a 20-80mm or 25–100mm 4x zoom to pair with the 11-20mm, I’d likely go with that based on cost savings but I’m kind of infatuated with the DZOfilm Tango 18-90mm range. That Lens Toolkit f8 app is great for imaging what these ranges can do and comparing two different zooms to each other.

The Tokina 86mm IRND filters are also good as I have 2, 4, 6 stop filtration. The Tango is a lot more glass for your money with M105 filters and an outside diameter of 114mm that fits my matte box. Heavy but I’m used to that with the Fujinon 20x B4 zoom.

If you do take advantage of the Tokina price reduction, I’d be eager to have your thoughts. Frankly I don’t understand why the Tango hasn’t had a major impact given the price under $10K. There are some positive reviews but it seems the higher price prohibits widespread adoption. It mimics the very popular Cabrio 19-90mm for Super35 in a budget lens.

Both the Tokina and the Tango are suitable to use as a single lens in a lot of shooting situations. Recording live events means I can’t buy into zoom pairs that split their zoom range anywhere near that 35-50mm mark. I need one range to reasonably cover my action.

For narrative work having two or three zooms is fine. Tokina goes from 11 to 135mm in three zooms so that’s extremely good for a variety of narrative shots. The 25-75mm will focus to 2.4’ away. But 18-90mm isn’t bad for narrative. A lot depends upon how far you want to be physically from your actors. Lately it seems a lot of films want you physically close to get that unique perspective from say a meter away. Then you might want to use that 12mm mm focal length which I have done. I normally stay minimum of 2-3 meters away which perspective psychologically is in our comfort zone in a conversation. Again Lens Tookit helps you plan your desired shot focal lengths in a shooting script before you actually shoot. Subject distance and perspective are two aspects that impact your selected focal length for a closeup as well as the simple frame coverage of course.

What are your thoughts and your needs? I think the price is very appealing if the range woks for you. If you are shooting Pyxis 12K L-mount, with PL lenses, the expander could be a no-brainer.

As to the Tokina 1.6 expander: It comes as PL to PL version or EF to PL without any electrical. I got the PL to PL and have been using it with an Arles 180mm for wildlife with a maximum aperture of about T3.84. It works GREAT and I am liking the results better than a Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM. (On the UMP 12K super-16 mode it is equivalent field of an 806mm)

Also for what it is worth: with the UMP 12K I find enough resolution to keep with primes and do small zooms in post. But I would still consider something like a 10 to 1 zoom. A 3x or even 4x zoom would not be justified for what I do.